News & Analysis as of

Generic Drugs Pharmaceutical Patents Teva Pharmaceuticals

WilmerHale

The Interplay: Key Decisions at the Intersection of Antitrust and Life Sciences - July 2024

WilmerHale on

Federal Circuit Allows Teva Patents to Remain in Orange Book.  - The Federal Circuit recently granted Teva Pharmaceutical’s motion for a stay of removal of its patents from the Orange Book in its ongoing dispute with...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

FTC's Campaign Against Improper Orange Book Listings Continues with Amicus Brief in Teva’s Challenge of Amneal Asthma Inhaler ANDA

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has filed an amicus brief in Teva Branded Pharmaceuticals Products R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC to further the agency’s efforts to promote and protect generic drug...more

WilmerHale

The Interplay: Key Decisions at the Intersection of Antitrust & Life Sciences - March 2024

WilmerHale on

Calls for Removal of Device Patents Listed in the Orange Book Continue. FTC and Congressional action scrutinizing allegedly “improper” Orange Book listings continued apace in the first few months of 2024. ...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Vanda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. Hetlioz® (Tasimelteon)

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Vanda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., No. 2023-1247, 2023 WL 3335538 (Fed. Cir. May 10, 2023)(Circuit Judges Dyk, Bryson, and Prost presiding; Opinion by Dyk, J.) (Appeal from D. Del., Connolly, J.)....more

Foley Hoag LLP

The Fate of the Skinny Label: Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC

Foley Hoag LLP on

On May 15, 2023, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC et al., a case some argued had enormous implications for so-called “skinny labeling” practices amongst generic drug...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Previewing Generic’s Skinny Label: Supreme Court to Rule on Teva’s Certiorari Petition

Foley Hoag LLP on

The Supreme Court is expected to consider Teva’s pending petition for certiorari in the highly anticipated GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. on May 11, 2023, a case that could carry enormous implications for the...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Vanda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. Hetlioz® (Tasimelteon)

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Vanda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Nos. 22-7528, 22-7529 (CCC), 2023 WL 1883357 (D.N.J. Feb. 10, 2023) (Cecchi, J.) - Drug Products and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Hetlioz® (tasimelteon); U.S. Patent No....more

Knobbe Martens

Teva v. GSK: The “Skinny” Label Case Pending Before the Supreme Court

Knobbe Martens on

On March 29, 2023, the Solicitor General of the United States asked the Supreme Court to review a Federal Circuit judgment in a Hatch-Waxman case between Teva and GSK. In its decision below, the Federal Circuit held that Teva...more

Goodwin

Supreme Court Cert Petitions on Skinny Label Inducement and Written Description Issues

Goodwin on

On July 11, 2022, Teva filed a cert petition with the Supreme Court, seeking review of the Federal Circuit’s split per curiam opinion holding that Teva’s label for its generic drug Coreg induced doctors to infringe a GSK...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Court Allows Antitrust Lawsuit by UnitedHealth to go Forward

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

One of the more fascinating developments in group health plan law has been the growth of antitrust claims by group health plans against drug manufactures who allegedly agree to delay the production of generic drugs once a...more

Knobbe Martens

When an Unmet Need May Not Be Enough

Knobbe Martens on

ADAPT PHARMA OPERATIONS LTD. V. TEVA PHARMS. USA, INC. Before Newman, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Summary: Recent attempts by competitors to achieve...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Vacates Judgment, Reinstates Jury's Verdict of Induced Infringement

Jones Day on

Background - On August 5, 2021, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in GlaxoSmithKline v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, Case No. 18-1976, in favor of GSK, finding that Teva was liable for inducing infringement of GSK's patent....more

Proskauer - Life Sciences

GSK v. Teva: Federal Circuit Issues New Opinion Analyzing Induced Infringement

On August 5, 2021, the Federal Circuit withdrew its October 2020 opinion in GSK v. Teva, summarized in this post on induced infringement of method-of-treatment claims, and issued an opinion that reiterated the prior holding...more

Knobbe Martens

Ineffective Skinny Label Leaves Generic Liable Despite Effort to Carve-Out the Patented Indication

Knobbe Martens on

GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. [OPINION] – PRECEDENTIAL - Before Moore, Newman, Prost (dissent). Panel rehearing of an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware - Summary:...more

McDermott Will & Emery

The Future of Skinny Labeling in Patent Litigation Will be Reconsidered

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has now vacated its prior ruling finding induced infringement based on so-called skinny labeling on a pharmaceutical product. GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Agrees to Reconsider Ruling in GSK v. Teva Drug Patent Case

A Federal Circuit panel on Tuesday vacated its earlier finding that Teva induced infringement of U.S. Patent No. RE40,000, GSK’s patent covering its drug, Coreg®, and set a new round of oral argument for February 23. Back in...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Coreg® (carvedilol) - Case Name: GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., No. 2018-1976, -2023 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 2, 2020) (Circuit Judges Prost, Newman, and Moore presiding; Opinion by Newman, J.; Dissent by Prost, C.J.)...more

A&O Shearman

European Commission completes current cycle of pay-for-delay probes with fines imposed on Teva and Cephalon

A&O Shearman on

On 26 November 2020, the European Commission (Commission) issued a decision fining pharmaceutical companies Teva and Cephalon EUR60.5 million for infringing Article 101 TFEU by agreeing to delay the entry of a cheaper generic...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

IBSA Institut Biochimique, S.A. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Tirosint®/levothyroxine sodium - Case Name: IBSA Institut Biochimique, S.A. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., No. 2019-2400 (Fed. Cir. July 31, 2020) (Circuit Judges Prost, Reyna, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Prost, C.J.)...more

Hogan Lovells

Labeling carve-out does not shield generic drug makers from induced infringement claims, CAFC rules

Hogan Lovells on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently decided (2-1) in GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. that a labeling carve-out by a generic drug sponsor did not preclude a finding of...more

Locke Lord LLP

Federal Circuit Places “Skinny Labels” in Danger

Locke Lord LLP on

Section viii of the Hatch-Waxman Act, 21 U.S.C. § 355(j)(2)(A)(viii), allows a generic applicant to “carve out” indications and other use information from its labeling that are protected by patents listed in FDA’s Orange Book...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

What Quantum of Culpable Conduct Is Required for an ANDA Applicant to Induce Infringement? The back-and-forth, (almost) cat-and-mouse-like competition between branded innovator and generic drug makers sanctioned under the...more

Knobbe Martens

Skinny Labelling on Generic Drugs Does Not Avoid Induced Infringement of Patents Covering Non-Indicated Uses

Knobbe Martens on

GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. [OPINION] – PRECEDENTIAL - Before Prost, Newman, and Moore. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware - Summary: Evidence of inducement for...more

Harris Beach PLLC

IBSA v. Teva: Indefinite Scope of Key Term in Patent Description Rendered a Thyroid Medication Patent Invalid Under Section 112

Harris Beach PLLC on

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed Delaware District Court’s finding of invalidity based on failure to define the scope of the invention and to meet the written description requirements of 35 USC § 112. IBSA...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Adapt Pharma Operations Ltd. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

BECAUSE A SKILLED ARTISAN WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED THE LIMITATIONS OF ONE PRIOR-ART REFERENCE AND WOULD HAVE BEEN MOTIVATED TO SELECT THE TEACHINGS OF ANOTHER REFERENCE TO OVERCOME THEM, THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT WERE OBVIOUS. Case...more

79 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide